freespirit
16th August 2012, 08:44 AM
this is nuts. 4 years??! un-friggin-real...
UK man gets four years for linking to videos on other websites (http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2012/08/uk-man-gets-four-years-for-linking-to-videos-on-other-websites.html)
By Lee Mathews (http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/author/lee)Comments (3) (http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2012/08/uk-man-gets-four-years-for-linking-to-videos-on-other-websites.html#comments)
Share on facebook (http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2012/08/uk-man-gets-four-years-for-linking-to-videos-on-other-websites.html#)Share on twitter (http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2012/08/uk-man-gets-four-years-for-linking-to-videos-on-other-websites.html#)Share on email (http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2012/08/uk-man-gets-four-years-for-linking-to-videos-on-other-websites.html#)More Sharing Services (http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2012/08/uk-man-gets-four-years-for-linking-to-videos-on-other-websites.html#)
People build websites to share all kinds of things with all kinds of other people. Turns out doing that might be more dangerous than you’d think.
http://www.sync-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/surfthechannel1.png (http://www.sync-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/surfthechannel1.png)Anton Vickerman’s name may not be familiar to you, but the U.K. man has the unique distinction of being the first person sentenced to jail time for running a links-only website. Vickerman operated SurfTheChannel.com, a site that directed users to other sites that served up video downloads and streams of popular programmes. In May, Vickerman was arraigned on charges of “conspiracy to defraud the movie industry through the facilitation of copyright infringement” and the two-month trial has now concluded. He was found guilty, and now faces four years in prison.SurfTheChannel was, in essence, a search engine and link respository. Vickerman was always very careful to make sure his own servers never served up any actual infringing content, and he went so far as to consult extensively with multiple legal experts to verify that he was playing by the rules. In fact, much of the content Vickerman did link to was hosted by sites like YouTube, Veoh, and BBC’s iplayer.What SurfTheChannel and other sites like it offer isn’t all that different than what any search engine (Google, Bing, Yahoo!) do. Such sites are more narrow in scope, of course, but they’re generally not displaying links that can’t be found elsewhere on the web. But it’s estimated that SurfTheChannel received around 400,000 visitors every day and generated around $54,000 in advertising revenue each month. That put the site squarely in the crosshairs of international copyright groups, who began their campaign against Vickerman in 2008 — despite the fact that SurfTheChannel itself didn’t break any laws. As we’ve seen before, though, that’s not always a sticking point. In many cases, leading the proverbial horse to water is all it takes.Beyond the fact that STC didn’t serve up any video from its own servers, it’s also interesting to note that Vickerman’s offence isn’t considered a crime if one person acts alone. His sentence is also double the maximum allowed for those found guilty of online copyright infringement in the U.K. Given the frequency with which we see criminals serve no jail time for offences like burglary, assault, and trafficking, it’s disconcerting to read that copyright groups have the power to send someone posting URLs up the river for nearly half a decade.Where does it end? There’s very little chance that you’d ever get in trouble for sharing links like those on STC on your Facebook wall or Twitter feed, but you never know. Joel Tenenbaum still faces fines in the area of $670,000 for sharing 31 songs via Kazaa, after all.[Sources: TorrentFreak (http://torrentfreak.com/surfthechannel-owner-sentenced-to-four-years-in-jail-120814/) and The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/aug/14/anton-vickerman-surfthechannel-sentenced?CMP=twt_gu)]
UK man gets four years for linking to videos on other websites (http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2012/08/uk-man-gets-four-years-for-linking-to-videos-on-other-websites.html)
By Lee Mathews (http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/author/lee)Comments (3) (http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2012/08/uk-man-gets-four-years-for-linking-to-videos-on-other-websites.html#comments)
Share on facebook (http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2012/08/uk-man-gets-four-years-for-linking-to-videos-on-other-websites.html#)Share on twitter (http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2012/08/uk-man-gets-four-years-for-linking-to-videos-on-other-websites.html#)Share on email (http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2012/08/uk-man-gets-four-years-for-linking-to-videos-on-other-websites.html#)More Sharing Services (http://www.sync-blog.com/sync/2012/08/uk-man-gets-four-years-for-linking-to-videos-on-other-websites.html#)
People build websites to share all kinds of things with all kinds of other people. Turns out doing that might be more dangerous than you’d think.
http://www.sync-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/surfthechannel1.png (http://www.sync-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/surfthechannel1.png)Anton Vickerman’s name may not be familiar to you, but the U.K. man has the unique distinction of being the first person sentenced to jail time for running a links-only website. Vickerman operated SurfTheChannel.com, a site that directed users to other sites that served up video downloads and streams of popular programmes. In May, Vickerman was arraigned on charges of “conspiracy to defraud the movie industry through the facilitation of copyright infringement” and the two-month trial has now concluded. He was found guilty, and now faces four years in prison.SurfTheChannel was, in essence, a search engine and link respository. Vickerman was always very careful to make sure his own servers never served up any actual infringing content, and he went so far as to consult extensively with multiple legal experts to verify that he was playing by the rules. In fact, much of the content Vickerman did link to was hosted by sites like YouTube, Veoh, and BBC’s iplayer.What SurfTheChannel and other sites like it offer isn’t all that different than what any search engine (Google, Bing, Yahoo!) do. Such sites are more narrow in scope, of course, but they’re generally not displaying links that can’t be found elsewhere on the web. But it’s estimated that SurfTheChannel received around 400,000 visitors every day and generated around $54,000 in advertising revenue each month. That put the site squarely in the crosshairs of international copyright groups, who began their campaign against Vickerman in 2008 — despite the fact that SurfTheChannel itself didn’t break any laws. As we’ve seen before, though, that’s not always a sticking point. In many cases, leading the proverbial horse to water is all it takes.Beyond the fact that STC didn’t serve up any video from its own servers, it’s also interesting to note that Vickerman’s offence isn’t considered a crime if one person acts alone. His sentence is also double the maximum allowed for those found guilty of online copyright infringement in the U.K. Given the frequency with which we see criminals serve no jail time for offences like burglary, assault, and trafficking, it’s disconcerting to read that copyright groups have the power to send someone posting URLs up the river for nearly half a decade.Where does it end? There’s very little chance that you’d ever get in trouble for sharing links like those on STC on your Facebook wall or Twitter feed, but you never know. Joel Tenenbaum still faces fines in the area of $670,000 for sharing 31 songs via Kazaa, after all.[Sources: TorrentFreak (http://torrentfreak.com/surfthechannel-owner-sentenced-to-four-years-in-jail-120814/) and The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/aug/14/anton-vickerman-surfthechannel-sentenced?CMP=twt_gu)]